Running head: 1ST ARTICLE ANALYSIS

Manuel Rivera 1st Article Analysis SOC341 Research in Social Sciences Siena Heights University 6/8/2013

1ST ARTICLE ANALYSIS Abstract

This paper will evaluate The Story of Work: A Narrative Analysis of Workplace Emotion (2005) by Connie J. Boudens of The University of Michigan and its components against the evaluation checklist written by Fred Pyrczak, California State University, in his book Evaluating Research in Academic Journals: A Practical Guide to Realistic Evaluation. The article, hereto identified as The Story, is attempting to analyze 452 narratives, from two previously published works, to answer two questions on whether a narrative analysis is useful and accessible means of examining the experience of emotion in organizations, (Boudens, 2005). ANALYSIS Title and Subtitle Reviewing the title Boudens proposes, The Story, suggests an analysis of emotions in the workplace by using narration as an evaluative tool. Though at first glance, the title seems efficient to tell the consumer what the article is about; the title offers a methodology of narrative analysis used by Boudens. It also alludes to the article variables; workers. With this information, some would say that the title and subtitle does a good job informing us as to the article content. However, I disagree with this. Using Pyrczaks evaluative checklist (2008), the title falls very short of sufficiently informing the reader of its content. First, Pyrczak asks Does the title identify the types of individuals who participated, (2008, pg 151)? The article does not make mention of actual participants for the study. One can infer that it would concentrate on workers, but what kind? The following list are reasons why the title and subtitle are inefficient in identifying participants: Title neglects to mention any participants for study

1ST ARTICLE ANALYSIS

Inferring workers as participants because of the verbiage Workplace Emotion in the subtitle is negligible; to infer this information does not give any clarification as to what people are used as participants. Are the participants from a certain age group or racial classification? What about the gender breakdown?

Title and subtitle does not tell consumer what type of workplace; the workplace is an important part of this study as not all workplaces are similar. The article mentions in the abstract (my next analysis in this paper) and that it will look at prototypical work situations. However, not every workplace would handle prototypical situations in the same manner. For example, an emotional response that anger displays of loud voice cues and assertive body language typically would not be tolerated in an office workplace. This type of behavior would more than likely land a person in the Human Resources office with possible discipline actions. Most people would say that this behavior is not allowable in any workplace. Whereas, if this behavior occurred by a corrections officer in a prison, most people would agree that it is imperative to the safety and control of the environment to exhibit this behavior.

Title and subtitle do not both provide important information about the report (Pyrczak, 2008, pg 151). Though the subtitle does mention the methodology of the narrative analysis and a very weak variable of workplace emotions of the inferred workers, the title is of no real value to the article. It represents the authors attempt to make a clever title that is wordplay on the subtitles narrative (Story) and work (Workplace).

CONCLUSION Title & Subtitle Though the aforementioned reasons for an ineffective title and subtitle were presented, using Pyrczaks checklist of evaluation questions, the title and subtitle scored better than the

1ST ARTICLE ANALYSIS information than I presented. With this, some would say that it is effective. However, an

effective evaluation should not simply look at the quantitative results, but should also look at the qualitative results. With the reasons I have listed above, I have determined that the title and subtitle are not effective, nor sufficient for a consumer. ANALYSIS Abstract An abstract is a summary of research report that appears below its title. Like the title, it helps consumers of research identify articles of interest. This function of abstracts is so important that the major computerized databases in the social and behavioral sciences provide abstracts as well as the titles of the articles they index (Pyrczak, 2008, pg 23). The Storys abstract starts off with a very strong first sentence, This paper argues that work-related emotion is best accessed using indirect means, including figures of speech and narrative, (Boudens, 2005). With the first sentence, it tells us of the articles purpose and suggests the possible methodology. This suggestion of the methodology is further strengthened with the next sentence of the abstract by specifically telling us that the methodology is that of narrative analysis, which we first informed about in the subtitle; An analysis of 452 narratives drawn from previously published works The abstract also tells the consumer what the article is trying to resolve or address; addressing two research questions: Where is the emotion in work? and What is the emotion in work, (Boudens, 2005)? Boudens continues to explain the methodology by letting the consumer know how each question will be answered; a series of prototypical work situations are identified, all of which are heavily charged with emotionsclusters of emotion associate with each prototypical situation are identified, (Boudens, 2005).

1ST ARTICLE ANALYSIS

The abstract continues to prove sufficient with alluding to findings of the article; An image of the vital dynamics of organizational life is presented on these results (Boudens, 2005). CONCLUSION Abstract Overall, the abstract does check off most of the evaluative questions in Pyrczaks guide. However, reviewing the title, subtitle, and abstract as a whole, they do not give a sufficient enough picture for the consumer to make a well-informed decision as to whether this article will be beneficial to their own research. For example, the abstract does not mention, as part of its methodology, how the narratives were recorded and interpreted. Though not mentioned as part of Pyrczaks checklist, I have concerns whether a consumer would even review The Story with such lackluster and inefficient opening information. For the aforementioned reasons, I have concluded that the abstract does not do a valid job in supporting the content of the article. ANALYSIS Introduction The article starts with the introduction using a narrative about workplace emotions; appropriately used considering this is the topic of the research within the article. Though this is a nice beginning, it lacks specificity to the identification of the research problem. Boudens opening narrative speaks about the marriage between the mechanical descriptions of a job with the then presented emotional connection to said mechanical process of a job; interviewee describes her job in two very different ways. Initially, she details the mechanical aspectsThis contrasts sharply with the final paragraph, where the interviewee talks about how she responds to her work(her) interaction with the task, makes her feel. While the first description might be useful as a guide to writing a technical document about the mechanics of the job, the second description provides an intimate insight into how the job feels, in both its task-related and social

1ST ARTICLE ANALYSIS

aspects. From this second type of account, wehave access to a unique view of the world of work, (Boudens, 2005). This description is used by Boudens to try and identify the specific problem of the research presented. However, even with this exhaustive explanation of the article, we are not specifically informed of any problem, let alone any resolution that the author may present. The introduction reads as though the authors intent as merely presenting information or means of accessinga method for examining workplace narratives, (Boudens, 2005). CONCLUSION Introduction Though the authors introduction does a good job at presenting what the article will potentially cover, i.e., figurative language and the expressions of emotion, methods for examining workplace narratives, and an analysis of a large group of workplace narratives, the lack of a specified problem, importance of the problem area, and any underlying theories that could described of emotions in the workplace, leads me to conclude that Boudens introduction is insufficient in informing the consumer about why or why not emotions in the workplace is good or badif that is even what Boudens is trying to prove. CONCLUSION Paper Upon evaluation of the aforementioned sections of article, The Story of Work: A Narrative Analysis of Workplace Emotion by Connie J. Boudens (2005), I have determined that the article inefficiently explains in detail what the research variables, methodology, and problem areas are and thus is not sufficient for use by consumers if viewed within a computerized database at a glance.

1ST ARTICLE ANALYSIS References

Boudens, C. (2005). The story of work: A narrative analysis of workplace emotion. (Doctoral dissertation, University of Michigan). Pyrczak, F. (2008). Evaluating research in academic journals: A practical guide to realistic evaluation. (4th ed.). Glendale, CA: Pyrczak Publishing.